Sperm Mosaic Variants and Their Influence on the Offspring

YANG Xiaoxu

Abstract

Genomic mosaicism arising from mosaic variants is a phenomenon that describes the presence of a cell or cell populations with different genome compositions from the germline cells of an individual. It comprises all types of genetic variants. A large proportion of childhood genetic disorders are defined as being de novo, meaning that the disease-causing mutations are only detected in the proband, not in any of the parents. Population studies show that 80% of the de novo mutations arise from the paternal haplotype, that is, from paternal sperm mosaicism. This review provides a summary of the types and detection strategies of sperm mosaicism. In addition, it provides discussions on how recent studies demonstrated that genomic mosaic mutations in parents, especially those in the paternal sperms, could be inherited by the offspring and cause childhood disorders. According to the previous findings of the author's research team, sperm mosaicism derived from early embryogenesis and primordial germ cell stages can explain 5% to 20% of the de novo mutations related to clinical phenotypes and can serve as an important predictor of both rare and complex disorders. Sperm mosaicism shows great potential for clinical genetic diagnosis and consultations. Based on the published literature, the author suggests that, large-scale screening for de novo sperm mosaic mutations and population-based genetic screening should be conducted in future studies, which will greatly enhance the risk assessment in the offspring and effectively improve the genetic health at the population level. Implementation of direct sperm detection for de novo mutations will significantly increase the efficiency of the stratification of patient cohorts and improve recurrence risk assessment for future births. Future research in the field should be focused on the impact of environmental and lifestyle factors on the health of the offspring through sperms and their modeling of mutation signatures. In addition, targeted in vitro modeling of sperm mutations will also be a promising direction.

 

 Keywords: Mosaicism, Sperm mosaicism, Allelic fraction, de novo variant, Review

 

Full Text:

PDF


References


GRAHAM J H, SCHLACHETZKI J C M, YANG X, et al. Genomic mosaicism of the brain: origin, impact, and utility. Neurosci Bull, 2023. doi: 10.1007/s12264-023-01124-8.

OHNO S, KAPLAN W D, KINOSITA R. Formation of the sex chromatin by a single x-chromosome in liver cells of rattus norvegicus. Exp Cell Res, 1959, 18: 415–418. doi: 10.1016/0014-4827(59)90031-X.

CHANDRA H S, NANJUNDIAH V. The evolution of genomic imprinting. Dev Suppl, 1990, 108 (Supplement): 47–53.

CONLIN L K, THIEL B D, BONNEMANN C G, et al. Mechanisms of mosaicism, chimerism and uniparental disomy identified by single nucleotide polymorphism array analysis. Hum Mol Genet, 2010, 19 (7): 1263–1275. doi: 10.1093/hmg/ddq003.

ABYZOV A, TOMASINI L, ZHOU B, et al. One thousand somatic snvs per skin fibroblast cell set baseline of mosaic mutational load with patterns that suggest proliferative origin. Genome Res, 2017, 27 (4): 512–523. doi: 10.1101/gr.215517.116.

DOU Y, KWON M, RODIN R E, et al. Accurate detection of mosaic variants in sequencing data without matched controls. Nat Biotechnol, 2020, 38 (3): 314–319. doi: 10.1038/s41587-019-0368-8.

SEKAR S, TOMASINI L, PROUKAKIS C, et al. Complex mosaic structural variations in human fetal brains. Genome Res, 2020, 30 (12): 1695–1704. doi: 10.1101/gr.262667.120.

MCCONNELL M J, LINDBERG M R, BRENNAND K J, et al. Mosaic copy number variation in human neurons. Science, 2013, 342 (6158): 632–637. doi: 10.1126/science.1243472.

NAM C H, YOUK J, KIM J Y, et al. Widespread somatic l1 retrotransposition in normal colorectal epithelium. Nature, 2023, 617 (7961): 540–547. doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06046-z.

ZEIHER A, BRAUN T. Mosaic loss of y chromosome during aging. Science, 2022, 377 (6603): 266–267. doi: 10.1126/science.add0839.

LI K, XIAO J, LING Z, et al. Prioritizing de novo potential non-canonical splicing variants in neurodevelopmental disorders. eBioMedicine, 2023, 99: 104928. doi: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2023.104928.

FREED D, STEVENS E L, PEVSNER J. Somatic mosaicism in the human genome. Genes, 2014, 5 (4): 1064–1094. doi: 10.3390/genes5041064.

DIETZ H C, CUTTING G R, PYERITZ R E, et al. Marfan syndrome caused by a recurrent de novo missense mutation in the fibrillin gene. Nature, 1991, 352 (6333): 337–339. doi: 10.1038/352337a0.

RENIERI A, SERI M, MYERS J C, et al. De novo mutation in the col4a5 gene converting glycine 325 to glutamic acid in alport syndrome. Hum Mol Genet, 1992, 1 (2): 127–129. doi: 10.1093/hmg/1.2.127.

Van SLEGTENHORST M, De HOOGT R, HERMANS C, et al. Identification of the tuberous sclerosis gene tsc1 on chromosome 9q34. Science, 1997, 277 (5327): 805–808. doi: 10.1126/science.277.5327.805.

CLAES L, Del-FAVERO J, CEULEMANS B, et al. De novo mutations in the sodium-channel gene scn1a cause severe myoclonic epilepsy of infancy. Am J Hum Genet, 2001, 68 (6): 1327–1332. doi: 10.1086/320609.

VISSERS L E, De LIGT J, GILISSEN C, et al. A de novo paradigm for mental retardation. Nat Genet, 2010, 42 (12): 1109–1112. doi: 10.1038/ng. 712.

NEALE B M, KOU Y, LIU L, et al. Patterns and rates of exonic de novo mutations in autism spectrum disorders. Nature, 2012, 485 (7397): 242–245. doi: 10.1038/nature11011.

ZAIDI S, CHOI M, WAKIMOTO H, et al. De novo mutations in histone-modifying genes in congenital heart disease. Nature, 2013, 498 (7453): 220–223. doi: 10.1038/nature12141.

GOLDMANN J M, VELTMAN J A, GILISSEN C. De novo mutations reflect development and aging of the human germline. Trends Genet, 2019, 35 (11): 828-839. doi: 10.1016/j.tig.2019.08.005.

BREUSS M W, YANG X, GLEESON J G. Sperm mosaicism: implications for genomic diversity and disease. Trends Genet, 2021, 37 (10): 890–902. doi: 10.1016/j.tig.2021.05.007.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.